Infamous patent holder has filed dozens of lawsuits in 2013.

Lodsys got attention back in 2011 when it went after small app developers, demanding about one half-percent (.575 percent, to be exact) of their revenue if they use in-app purchases. By May of that year, Apple intervened in the legal action, arguing that since it had already licensed the Lodsys patents, developers should be protected.

Apple's intervention has hardly been a quick fix, though. Its argument has taken a mighty long time to get consideration in the East Texas court where it's fighting. And there's nothing to stop Lodsys from filing patent lawsuits against new targets—which is exactly what it's been doing. And Lodsys also believes its patents entitle it to royalties from websites that use certain types of "interactive chat, user feedback form, and survey features," enabling it to sue practically any company with a website.

In just one lawsuit filed last November, Lodsys claimed that charter.com (a cable company), lampsplus.com (a retailer), corbisimages.com (image licensing), and shop.nordstrom.com all infringed its two patents, numbered 7,620,565 and 7,222,078.

Last week, Lodsys fired off its latest round of lawsuits against several mobile game companies, including Paris-based Gameloft and Korean gaming shop Gamevil. It also sued The Walt Disney Company, claiming its mobile games also violated the two patents. One target, TLA Systems, makes a scientific calculator app called PCalc rather than games.

Many of Lodsys' cases have been consolidated into one, with discovery pushing forward and a trial currently scheduled for October 2013. That means that whatever the state of Apple's intervention, it hasn't been able to protect Lodsys targets from being forced into expensive and lengthy legal proceedings. It looks like the judge overseeing the case has decided the consolidated lawsuit must slog through discovery before Apple's arguments are considered.

Meanwhile, Lodsys is cashing checks. In October, Lodsys reported that it has convinced more than 150 companies to pay up, and that number is surely higher now. The consolidated case docket indicates Lodsys is wrapping up deals with major corporations. Atari, Take Two Interactive, Estee Lauder, and The Men's Wearhouse all settled in January.

Since the beginning of 2013, Lodsys has sued dozens of new targets. The lawsuits are based on the same two patents, and name user feedback and interactive chat features for various corporate websites as infringing. All the lawsuits are filed in Marshall, Texas—where Lodsys, like many so-called "patent trolls," claims to have an office. Some of Lodsys' latest targets include the following:

In April, Lodsys turned to mobile game studios. These lawsuits don't mention interactive chat, and so Lodsys appears to have gone back to suing over in-app purchasing, rather than the user feedback and chat claims it has made against retailers earlier. In a batch of suits filed April 1 and 2, Lodsys sued Gameloft [PDF], BackFlip Studios, Gamevil [PDF], Jirbo [PDF], MobileAge [PDF], Pocket Gems [PDF], Sunstorm Interactive, TMSoft [PDF], TLA Systems [PDF], and The Walt Disney Company [PDF]. Those targets are mostly, but not exclusively, game developers.

Each of the mobile gaming suits names one example of an infringing app. For example, the complaint against Gameloft names Real Soccer 2012, and the suit against Disney names Where's My Water?

While Lodsys first gained a bad reputation for going after small developers, the company has clearly shown it's ready to wage patent battles with foes large and small. Just looking at the mobile gaming lawsuits, the targets range from quite large (Gameloft with 5000+ employees) to medium-sized (Pocket Gems with about 150 workers), to the apparently quite small (TLA Systems).

The continued filing of lawsuits, together with the fact that interventions by both Apple and Google have failed to stop the rampage, inspired a blog post from EFF last week, entitled "Lodsys is back. It's time to beat this troll."

"We hadn't heard anything ... from Lodsys in the meantime and assumed (foolishly, perhaps) that it was waiting to see what the judge said," wrote EFF staff lawyer Julie Samuels. "This week, that all changed."

The EFF post directs developers to an FAQ about Lodsys and offers help for defendants looking for lawyers. But it seems unlikely that patent campaigns like the Lodsys one can be put down without some overall reform to the system. If the Lodsys case proves anything, it's that the vigorous intervention of "big guys" like Apple and Google can't always stop a patent holder determined to extract payments from smaller targets.

Is it possible for Apple to file for an injunction to prevent these notices and lawsuits from proceeding, pending the conclusion of their intervention in one of the original suits? If Apple wins there, then Lodsys gets to walk away with all the settlements that they shouldn't be able to collect for.

I guess that would be asking for sanity in the world of patent law. So, nevermind.

So long as the ones abusing the system can abuse it, they'll tolerate the predatory actions of shell companies like these. They're the ones that give them patents, an "investment" of funds, and let them loose.

Is it possible for Apple to file for an injunction to prevent these notices and lawsuits from proceeding, pending the conclusion of their intervention in one of the original suits? If Apple wins there, then Lodsys gets to walk away with all the settlements that they shouldn't be able to collect for.

I guess that would be asking for sanity in the world of patent law. So, nevermind.

As far as patent law is concerned (and that's discounting the fact that small developers have essentially no options, as the cost of a lawyer probably makes going out of business look like a good choice) you, as someone who programs for a specific platform, have essentially developed that entire platform yourself and are liable for any infringements even if you were never involved with an API's development and even if the only agreement you've made (with Apple) gives you a license to use any of the APIs. Apple's only means of helping is to provide a separate decision which shows that the license is extended to any users of the SDK, but that's it. It's up the developer themselves to prove such a thing individually.

I say it's time to shoot these trolls. No, not to death; in the knee cap, so that every step they take for the rest of their unworthy life (and a waste of resources) serves as a reminder, and as a warning to everyone that sees them limp. Pity that it's not legal to do so.

These cases aren't examples of why the patent system that needs reform. Apple, Google are saying the patent license system works and Lodsys cannot collect any fees because the patents are already licensed to the developers.

Lodsys is saying the patent license system doesn't work and that they deserve free money.

The actual thing that these cases are examples of are why the court system needs reform. Namely, that companies, like Lodsys, that file/use lawsuits as threats knowing that the lawsuits would never be found in Lodsys' favor by the courts should be punished. Punished hard. By the law. Any Lodsys-calibre troll should have all assets seized that were gained by this extortion.

I say it's time to shoot these trolls. No, not to death; in the knee cap, so that every step they take for the rest of their unworthy life (and a waste of resources) serves as a reminder, and as a warning to everyone that sees them limp. Pity that it's not legal to do so.

I agree wholeheartedly, and I have a feeling these trollfolk are going to go after the wrong person one day. When that finally happens, then we may finally see some legislative reform--sensible or otherwise.

I say it's time to shoot these trolls. No, not to death; in the knee cap, so that every step they take for the rest of their unworthy life (and a waste of resources) serves as a reminder, and as a warning to everyone that sees them limp. Pity that it's not legal to do so.

There's one silver lining in all this. Most people have little sympathy for big companies that are attacked by patent trolls. But going after tons of defenseless little app developers, who are often regular young people all across the world- everyone knows someone who has written an app, even people who could never themselves; that's like taking candy from a kid. Finally, we can say "think of the children" with reason.

I think the patent trolls have finally picked on someone that the regular public and the "internet" as a whole will stick up for, with prejudice. It will light the internet on fire. Screw Lodsys, Intellectual Ventures, and Nathan Myrvold. Pass the word. Wake up, internet.

We must focus the attention of the world on this, because that is what will cause reform. The politicians only bend over when they think we aren't all staring at them. The time is right, the time is now.

I feel there should be an amendment to such laws, where the holder of the patent, does not use the particular "invention" of his and it benefits the general community I am looking at you Myraids Geneiticc Inc. Here in this case the in-app purchase benefits a large section of the people.

Really? You don't have any cousins or nephews or friends in high school or college who know anything about computers? Because lots of regular high school and college kids are learning to write apps these days. You might be surprised. You might want to get out more.

Yes really. And I'm an experienced developer too. Thanks for your concern but I get out often enough, and I find that when I get out the people I meet don't sit at home in their basement writing apps.

You need to be careful when generalising based on your own narrow experience because its a big world out there and saying and assuming things like "everyone knows" or "everyone does" is often complete hyperbole. People with the requisite knowledge and skills to conceive and develop an app (or even write a simple hello world program) are in the vast minority.

So while your anger at this kind of ridiculous patent system is justified, the argument that the poor downtrodden masses of app developers and their friends are going to be the undoing of it is tenuous to say the least.

Living in Europe I can only be puzzled by the existence of software patents in the US. Patents are designed to protect inventions, not ideas. Software is copyrightable but by this definition not patentable, and as is evident causes a great deal of hassle.

The only solution is for Apple/Google/Microsoft to join forces and campaign to scrap all software patents, rather than using them as petty weapons against each other with an effect ~ 0. The consequences for small developers and future innovation are far more serious due to limited financial backing.

The net effect is ultimately that innovation will likely move to other countries where such patents are not allowed, and the US will lose its significant leadership. Secondly due to potential litigation US citizens may be left out of the next greatest thing.

Living in Europe I can only be puzzled by the existence of software patents in the US. Patents are designed to protect inventions, not ideas. Software is copyrightable but by this definition not patentable, and as is evident causes a great deal of hassle.

The only solution is for Apple/Google/Microsoft to join forces and campaign to scrap all software patents, rather than using them as petty weapons against each other with an effect ~ 0. The consequences for small developers and future innovation are far more serious due to limited financial backing.

The big software companies are pushing for software patents in Europe, not pushing against software patents in the US. They are also aquiring more patents as time goes on and buying patents from other companies.

rfle500 wrote:

The net effect is ultimately that innovation will likely move to other countries where such patents are not allowed, and the US will lose its significant leadership. Secondly due to potential litigation US citizens may be left out of the next greatest thing.

But this hasn't stopped Apple from seeking injunctions against Samsung products in Germany using the rubber-band patent. Yes, the patent was invalidated but getting the invalidation still involved legal fees.

While I agree that companies should be protected from patent trolls like Lodsys, I'm very concerned that (seemingly) a large group of Ars Technica's readership thinks violence is an acceptable response.

Really? You don't have any cousins or nephews or friends in high school or college who know anything about computers? Because lots of regular high school and college kids are learning to write apps these days. You might be surprised. You might want to get out more.

The other thing is that there is little (to no?) proof that Lodsys actually owns these patents. Much like the MPAA/RIAA member groups threatening people with lawsuits for pirating works the company doesn't own.

Or like Krusty getting sued and losing after Homer gets facial burns from onion rings at a fast food joint Krusty doesn't even own.

Living in Europe I can only be puzzled by the existence of software patents in the US. Patents are designed to protect inventions, not ideas. Software is copyrightable but by this definition not patentable, and as is evident causes a great deal of hassle.

The only solution is for Apple/Google/Microsoft to join forces and campaign to scrap all software patents, rather than using them as petty weapons against each other with an effect ~ 0. The consequences for small developers and future innovation are far more serious due to limited financial backing.

The net effect is ultimately that innovation will likely move to other countries where such patents are not allowed, and the US will lose its significant leadership. Secondly due to potential litigation US citizens may be left out of the next greatest thing.

The problem is that, despite what's said in this article, huge software companies like Apple don't engage in "vigorous intervention" in patent cases either to protect themselves or others. Partially this is because those companies (Apple in particular) frequently benefit from very similar lawsuits based on equally silly patents. At least they're using their patents, unlike the trolls, but they still sometimes benefit from a system that allows giant lawsuits for dumb patents.

The bigger problem, in my opinion, is that big public companies (at least here in America) absolutely worship short term finances to the exclusion of everything else. And due to the way our legal system works, it's cheaper in the short term to settle than to fight patent lawsuits and risk losing or try to reform the system (lobbying isn't cheap you know ). The fact is that companies like Apple could have a HUGE positive impact on software patents in the US...but they, and their investors, just can't be bothered to think further ahead than the next quarterly earnings report.

If corporations could fix the long-term thinking issue, that could help reform more than patents. That seems to be an uphill climb though.

Good grief, Lodsys are like the North Korea of patent trolls -- rampaging about with all the rationality of a hungry two year-old, but mystifyingly getting the results it wants against far superior adversaries.

It would be nice if we lived in a world where people like this were punished by the justice system instead of rewarded by it.

Also, I get the sense that East Texas is proud of itself for this.

The rest of Texas would be willing to pay to have them surgically removed.

EDIT:

ChrisSD wrote:

While I agree that companies should be protected from patent trolls like Lodsys, I'm very concerned that (seemingly) a large group of Ars Technica's readership thinks violence is an acceptable response.

If playing video games over the years has taught me anything it is that if violence isn't solving your problems then you aren't using enough of it.